Why are they trying to ban online ammo purchases?

Did I miss something? Why are they talking about banning online or mail order ammo purchases. Why would anybody care where you buy your ammo?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are they trying to ban online ammo purchases?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

Horny Toad

January 7, 2013, 05:36 PM

Antis don't want private firearm ownership, period. So if making it more difficult or expensive for you to get ammo means you'll shoot less or have less ammo, that's a positive for them.

Slipknot_Slim

January 7, 2013, 05:42 PM

The ultimate goal is to limit the quantity of ammunition that you can purchase over a particular period. Buying in person will better allow the government to track individual purchases and perhaps establish a registry of who has what and how much of it they have. It's also impossible to verify a person's age when they purchase online. You pretty much just take their word for it when they click the box that says they are old enough.

horsemen61

January 7, 2013, 05:44 PM

yep that pretty much sums it up

JERRY

January 7, 2013, 05:46 PM

increments. little by little chipping away at our rights.....

blarby

January 7, 2013, 06:03 PM

Because the Aurora shooter purportedly purchased 1k rounds online, trained with a very small amount of them, and used less than 100 of them in the shooting.

Thats the cause. The reasons are outlined well above, about as well can be.

Zoogster

January 7, 2013, 06:04 PM

In some parts of europe they have yearly maximum amounts of ammo a person can buy, sometimes limited to calibers of guns they are registered as owning.
These amounts are actually relatively small compared to what many go through target shooting here.
Some places require they go through a formal process to purchase a fixed quantity of ammunition, including giving a reason or need for such ammunition, or showing they have a place to hunt or some other demonstratable use.
They can also restrict some ammunition based on the use they specify. For example someone buying shotgun shells to hunt birds may not be permitted to purchase shotgun slugs.

It also allows the government to keep track of who has what and where.
It has no real connection with mass shootings, but would be more useful to a government in situations like rebellion or civil unrest. They can limit stockpiles, theoretically more easily deal with insurection or rebellion, and starve an enemy of such well tracked supplies.
Most conflicts require large amounts of ammunition, and such things can better insure government will always win if a conflict lasts long enough.
It also allows easier identification of 'gun nuts' based on large purchases that seem larger than what they deem is normal.
It also has little impact on criminals, as most of them use very little ammunition.

In places with firearm registration is also limits people to either purchasing ammunition calibers just for firearms they have registered, or when not restricted can help red flagging people buying calibers they have no firearm on record as owning that can use them.

Overall it is just part of an extensive strategy to limit arms of the people.
Sometimes each piece of the puzzle makes less sense on its own, or does not become very useful until another piece of the puzzle connects to it.
At which point something that seemed mundane can become very effective at enforcing draconian restrictions.

At the consumer level it also means firearms in calibers which are not often available at the local gun store would be difficult to feed, and when someone can locate such ammunition will have to pay whatever excessive price is asked.

aka108

January 7, 2013, 06:09 PM

What's also bad is that where I live no company stocks ammo by the case. Try to buy a box of Eley or any of the high end ammo. Just does not exist. Same way for reloading materials. The person who intends to do harm with his or her weapon will still go to a big box store and buy a few boxes of ammo to do whatever they plan. Eliminating mail order will do nothing except make it more expensive for the serious and frequent shooter to enjoy their sport.

medalguy

January 7, 2013, 11:01 PM

It's also because the legislators are very stupid. Look at the differences. Buy ammo online, you have to give a credit card number, name and address, and that's verified before the transaction is completed. Everything but your fingerprints.

Buy in person at a retail store, pay cash, walk away with the ammo. No name, no age unless they happen to ask for it, no address or veification of anything. Pay and scoot.

No one ever said gun laws have to make any sense or do any good. We just have to do something.

Pilot

January 7, 2013, 11:09 PM

It is not about solving illegal violence. It is about fulfilling the anti gun agenda. The ends justify the means to them.

bubbameat

January 8, 2013, 02:49 PM

It's also because the legislators are very stupid. Look at the differences. Buy ammo online, you have to give a credit card number, name and address, and that's verified before the transaction is completed. Everything but your fingerprints.

Buy in person at a retail store, pay cash, walk away with the ammo. No name, no age unless they happen to ask for it, no address or veification of anything. Pay and scoot.

No one ever said gun laws have to make any sense or do any good. We just have to do something.

Yeah I thought I heard something about having to "register" to buy ammo.

mgkdrgn

January 8, 2013, 08:20 PM

because they think they can

Buffalosix

January 9, 2013, 09:22 AM

Medalguy - you got it. If I were trying to be more restrictive, I would WANT more online sales of ammo because one, you get identifying information via credit card, two, you get all of the additional information that comes with the credit card record, and three, you have the ability, if necessary, to intercept delivery.

B6

Master Blaster

January 9, 2013, 07:12 PM

Because they want to, and think they can get away with it, same as online sales of fire arms, magazines and firearm parts, they are after anything they can do to ban the shooting sports, and civilian gun ownership. It would be especially painful for folks who shoot .22lr in bench rest, offhand, silouhette competition, because local gun stores, seldom stock any match grade ammo. I buy all my match .22 ammo online as None is available locally. It would also hit reloader hard as most components bought in bulk are from online sources.

Dr.Rob

January 9, 2013, 07:19 PM

Limits supply to wjhat is available locally.. and we see what happens anytime there is a scare you can't find ammo.

bushmaster1313

January 9, 2013, 09:11 PM

I do not like the idea of banning online sales of ammo because there is certain ammo, like .257 Roberts, that is hard to find at gun shops.

On the other hand, a ban on online sales, or a law that online sales require a NICS check, will make it somewhat more difficult for convicted felons to acquire ammunition.

Jim K

January 9, 2013, 09:18 PM

The anti's want all ammo sales registered and recorded and dealer sales will do that. It is harder with on-line/mail order sales.

They are also looking forward to universal ammo serial numbering (the micro-stamping proposal) and again requiring dealers to keep records and limit the amount of ammo sold will be easier.

Jim

railroader

January 9, 2013, 09:29 PM

I do not like the idea of banning online sales of ammo because there is certain ammo, like .257 Roberts, that is hard to find at gun shops.

On the other hand, a ban on online sales, or a law that online sales require a NICS check, will make it somewhat more difficult for convicted felons to acquire ammunition.

It's already illegal for convicted felons to have guns and ammo so making law abiding gun owners jump through hoops is ok?

bushmaster1313

January 9, 2013, 09:52 PM

It's already illegal for convicted felons to have guns and ammo so making law abiding gun owners jump through hoops is ok?

Inconvenient, yes, but IMHO not unconstitutional.

A law making it illegal for convicted felons to have guns and ammo has no teeth if they can buy them through the mail without a background check.

I see an online ammo ban coming, and it will not be overturned.

Paradoxically, it's not the person who has enough money to buy 10,000 rounds of centerfire ammo who is scary. A person who only has enough money to buy 3 or four bullets is probably a thousand times more likely to commit a crime with a gun than a well-heeled bulk ammo buyer.

scootter31

January 10, 2013, 11:24 PM

control, control,control

Also, it's something for us to give in to. The chipping away.:banghead:

DurangoKid

January 10, 2013, 11:52 PM

The first thing a would be Dictator does is ID and punsh his enemies. Obama spells enemy NRA.:uhoh:

RP88

January 11, 2013, 12:06 AM

as said, increments.

Remember their true goals: registration, draconian taxing, draconian registration to the point where taking too much tylenol is a instant DQ from gun rights, no carry, 500% ammo price, can't have more than one mag of ammo ever, microstamped ammo and firing pins, no semi-autos, no self-defense clause, off-site storage only, etc. etc. etc.

Banning online anything is a small stepping stone toward that.

Jack19

January 12, 2013, 07:33 AM

Pure and simple TAXATION.

Most internet sales go untaxed. Forcing you to buy locally assures that you are taxed for your purchase.

beatledog7

January 12, 2013, 08:15 AM

Voters see Aurora, and they cry, "Do something!" Holmes is said to have bought the ammo on line, so they push to stop us from buying ammo on line. It doesn't matter whether that will actually stop a future theatre shooting; it's all about how the legislator thinks his/her action will be seen by the media and by the next election's voters and contributors.

Voters see Sandy Hook, and they cry, "Do something!" Lanza is said to have stolen those guns after murdering his mother, meaning they were not kept securely locked up, so they push to force us to keep all firearms unloaded and locked up. It doesn't matter whether that will actually stop a future school shooting; it's all about how the legislator thinks his/her action will be seen by the media and by the next election's voters and contributors.

See the pattern? It comes down to being able to present the appearance, for their constituents, that they did something that can be tied directly back to the latest incident. That's about as far as the average anti can see. Heck, if Lanza had used an XD with an OD frame, they'd be trying to ban green.

winterhorse290

January 12, 2013, 10:57 AM

think of it this way. they can,t outlaw cars(yet) but they can raise the price of gas to the point only the very rich can afford it. by "outlawing" online ammo sales, the price at the brick and motar store will double. and then you have a backdoor ammo control. best stock up now before the price goes out of sight and can,t be had at any price.

Ehtereon11B

January 12, 2013, 12:07 PM

The Aurora shooting has added fuel to the whole limiting online ammo purchases. Holmes ordered 1-6K rounds of ammo online, the number varies depending on who you read. To a legal gun owner with legal intentions, that is a great day at the range with some left to stockpile. But to anyone who is afraid of firearms, ordering ammo means you are going on a shooting spree at a petting zoo or something.

tulsamal

January 13, 2013, 10:40 AM

The anti's want all ammo sales registered and recorded and dealer sales will do that. It is harder with on-line/mail order sales.

Most of us here are old enough to remember... but I'm sure we have some younger people that don't. For their benefit, a little history.

We _used_ to have a requirement that ammunition sales be recorded. I was just a teenager back then (1970's) but I would be down in rural Oklahoma and want a couple boxes of .22 LR. You could buy it at just about any store. Walk into the grocery store and buy it from the cashier like the way people ask for cigarettes now. But even for a 50 round box of .22's, the cashier would have to get our her bound ledger book and record the information. How much you bought, who you were, what was your address? It was a pain in the butt for both sides.

But ultimately this requirement was done away with. As I remember, the ATF was asked by Congress to provide evidence that all this data collecting had ever been instrumental in solving a crime. Turned out they could show cases where they had pinpointed an ammo transaction... after they had already found and arrested the bad guy. They couldn't find a single case where the records themselves actually led to the discovery of the bad guy. So Congress was able to treat all this paperwork as "wasteful and pointless bureaucracy" and do away with it. Kind of sad that some pin heads want to bring all that back!!

Gregg

KTXdm9

January 13, 2013, 08:29 PM

Thank you for that needed dose of common sense tulsamal.

Wolfman131

January 13, 2013, 08:38 PM

Did I miss something? Why are they talking about banning online or mail order ammo purchases. Why would anybody care where you buy your ammo?
Well, ask your self some other questions, such as, how would stripping American citizens of their liberty to purchase a firearm privately(gun show loophole), without government interference have made any difference in the last half dozen school house slaughters?

The answer, it wouldn't anymore than you're ability to purchase ammo online. You see, they are after guns & ammunition period! All of the measures you are hearing aired out by the dedicated anti-gun political class, are only intended to impact law abiding Americans.

Think of it this way, the pro-statist gun confiscators, they are throwing handfuls of mud at the wall, and looking to see what sticks.

tactikel

January 13, 2013, 09:08 PM

The "anti's" are throwing everything against the wall, waiting to see what sticks.
Cook county (Chicago) attempted to impose a 5 cent a round tax, $25 on a brick of .22s, as a violence tax :cuss:. They were dead serious. The tax, which would have effectively killed all ammo sales in the County (their goal), died before a vote BUT they did impose a $25 firearm transfer tax. The ability to tax is the ability to control, and destroy. :fire:

Slotback

January 13, 2013, 09:18 PM

What Pilot said.

sonick808

January 14, 2013, 10:59 AM

anything that's convenient, they don't like

thing is, reloading is a lot faster than ordering and waiting..

HighExpert

January 15, 2013, 06:42 PM

Has anyone considered that "gun control" may be a smoke screen for the ultimate goal? What if the current administration really wants to anger the gun owners enough to get a bunch of us in the streets doing armed protests? Have you checked out what happens under martial law as far as the position of president being put into second place and assuming the commander in chief role as primary? You can forget elections, the constitution, guaranteed rights and the nation we all love and support. And, no, I am not a comspiracy nut but, I do wonder how someone who is supposed to be the smartest guy in the room can make so many errors and stomp all over the constitution as often as he does and not have some hidden agenda. Just wondering.

xfyrfiter

January 15, 2013, 07:25 PM

Has anyone considered that "gun control" may be a smoke screen for the ultimate goal? What if the current administration really wants to anger the gun owners enough to get a bunch of us in the streets doing armed protests? Have you checked out what happens under martial law as far as the position of president being put into second place and assuming the commander in chief role as primary? You can forget elections, the constitution, guaranteed rights and the nation we all love and support. And, no, I am not a comspiracy nut but, I do wonder how someone who is supposed to be the smartest guy in the room can make so many errors and stomp all over the constitution as often as he does and not have some hidden agenda. Just wondering.
Absolutely spot on.

blkbrd666

January 15, 2013, 07:47 PM

And at that point, civil unrest is not the problem...some other country will come in and take over.

Wolfman131

January 15, 2013, 09:16 PM

I do not like the idea of banning online sales of ammo because there is certain ammo, like .257 Roberts, that is hard to find at gun shops.

On the other hand, a ban on online sales, or a law that online sales require a NICS check, will make it somewhat more difficult for convicted felons to acquire ammunition.
Maybe, you should just turn in your firearms now, and be done with it. After all, those felons you seem so willing to ditch my liberties for, are about five times more likely to get their guns from you!

Wolfman131

January 15, 2013, 09:18 PM

And at that point, civil unrest is not the problem...some other country will come in and take over.
Oh, hows that?

Sauer Grapes

January 17, 2013, 08:46 PM

Yeah I thought I heard something about having to "register" to buy ammo.

Connecticut is proposing that in their gun control bill right know. arg

Sauer Grapes

January 17, 2013, 08:51 PM

To a legal gun owner with legal intentions, that is a great day at the range with some left to stockpile. But to anyone who is afraid of firearms, ordering ammo means you are going on a shooting spree at a petting zoo or something.

I like that! 6,000 rounds, that's a day at a picnic with some friends.

michaelbsc

January 18, 2013, 01:23 AM

On the other hand, a ban on online sales, or a law that online sales require a NICS check, will make it somewhat more difficult for convicted felons to acquire ammunition.

This is naive at best.

First off, which of the disturbed young men involved in the recent shootings was a convicted felon?

None of them were, So we won't be saving any children there.

Next, no "convicted felon" that's a violent offender is going to give a hoot about getting legal ammo for his/her illegal gun. My wife spent a year working with the medical staff at a state penitentiary, and I'm here to tell you that those guys can get almost anything they want inside the prison.

Keeping ammo out of their hands while they're walking around out of prison will be harder than sucking a vacuum on a Mason jar with holes in the lid.

No, that proposed reg is aimed at us, not at criminals. Don't kid yourself.

Evergreen

January 18, 2013, 01:28 AM

Why do they want to ban ammo?? Why do they want to ban a majority of semi automatic weapons we own? Do you think the Assault Weapon Ban is just to ban "assault weapons" or what us more educated people know as semi automatic magazine fed rifles? No, if you read the AWB bill clearly, you will see a good majority of semi auto handguns are also going to be classified as "Assault Weapons". Basically, except for 1911s and Revolvers, there will not be many guns you will be allowed to own with this "New and Improved" Assault Weapon Ban.

Read the bottom of my signature and you will get the answer to your question.

On the other hand, a ban on online sales, or a law that online sales require a NICS check, will make it somewhat more difficult for convicted felons to acquire ammunition.
Bushmaster1313, banning guns will make it even more difficult for convicted felons to acquire guns. In Nazi Germany, the streets were very safe until the government started committing mass murders. Basically, 20 dead kids in a single day didn't look like much compared to the 1000s of civilians, including women and children, that were massacred by criminal governments.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why are they trying to ban online ammo purchases?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!